This is why we "Core support" try to fund SF and Don & Derek Black AM radio show. Along with one time donators.
We as whites can do things to recover, and make better our present situation. But it doe's require that nasty think called money.
So let me remind everyone to click the BIG RED button at the bottom of this page.

If a man murders his wife and children, it is called murder not suicide. It isn't suicide until he turns the gun on himself. Current anti-white policies are genocidal. It wouldn't be suicide unless we are all gone and the white anti-whites want to do themselves in.

I think the reference is to the lemmings that deliberately support policies and leaders that intend to disposess them for starters, and eventually wipe them out.

Examples: Affirmative action, forced busing, integration, homosexual marriage and immigration---not to mention the Obama victory, supported in large part by clueless Whites, who voted for him in substantial numbers.

Some of these, esp. integration and immigration are widely supported by White Yuppies, most of whom are Gentiles.

Then also there is the example of WW II, the war of Western Hara-Kiri, which was prosecuted by United Nations forces consisting almost entirely of Gentiles.

If that ain't suicidal behavior, I don't know what is.

Add to this the automatic forfeiture of city after city which I have personally witnessed here in Los Angeles to the invading hordes south of the Mexican line. It is simply astounding--there is no precedent in all history that I know of for a people simply walking away from their own lands without even a token fight.

It defies belief.

From Waaay Out West,

--HLM

__________________

******

To men a man is but a mind. Who cares What face he carries or what form he wears? But woman's body is the woman.

—Jogo Tyree (Devil's Dictionary), A. Bierce

America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.

--Claire Wolfe

Every great cause begins as a movement, degenerates into a business and ends up as a racket.

This is my position also: not White Genocide, but rather White Suicide.

--HLM

While the article has some good points about never forgive or forget. I could not disagree with you more. The men and women of our race have never once been given the privilege of voting one way or another in regards to any of this nonsense. It was forced down their throats without their consent. You cannot fault them for being nice and easy going and law abiding. That is our racial nature. And you most certainly cannot fault them for giving some overwhelming approval for this stuff. Simply because there is no evidence of majority approval.

I suggest you lend me your ear and listen to the BUGS piece at the Conference when it goes up. It will shed light on WHY it must be genocide.

I think the reference is to the lemmings that deliberately support policies and leaders that intend to disposess them for starters, and eventually wipe them out.

Examples: Affirmative action, forced busing, integration, homosexual marriage and immigration---not to mention the Obama victory, supported in large part by clueless Whites, who voted for him in substantial numbers.

Some of these, esp. integration and immigration are widely supported by White Yuppies, most of whom are Gentiles.

Then also there is the example of WW II, the war of Western Hara-Kiri, which was prosecuted by United Nations forces consisting almost entirely of Gentiles.

If that ain't suicidal behavior, I don't know what is.

Add to this the automatic forfeiture of city after city which I have personally witnessed here in Los Angeles to the invading hordes south of the Mexican line. It is simply astounding--there is no precedent in all history that I know of for a people simply walking away from their own lands without even a token fight.

While the article has some good points about never forgive or forget. I could not disagree with you more. The men and women of our race have never once been given the privilege of voting one way or another in regards to any of this nonsense. It was forced down their throats without their consent. You cannot fault them for being nice and easy going and law abiding. That is our racial nature. And you most certainly cannot fault them for giving some overwhelming approval for this stuff. Simply because there is no evidence of majority approval.

I suggest you lend me your ear and listen to the BUGS piece at the Conference when it goes up. It will shed light on WHY it must be genocide.

thanks

Modern man in the West is indeed very forgiving, but this is only a fluke of recent history, and is a result of extreme decadence.

Back in my school days, I read a history of the Punic Wars and also a bit of Medieval history, particularly the history of capital punishment. At one time I think there were as many as 200 capital crimes in England:

..The Third Punic War lasted longer than Rome expected, though there was little doubt as to the outcome. After a lengthy siege the Romans, under the command of Scipio Aemilianus, forced the city to surrender, but only after a great many women, children, and elderly had been killed or wounded when Scipio ordered residential buildings set on fire to clear a path to the citadel. Fifty thousand men, women, and children were sold into slavery. Roman soldiers looted the city for several days, after which a board of ten Roman senators oversaw the systematic destruction of the city. Carthage was burned to the ground and buildings were razed. ...

. (389) Now as Eleazar was proceeding on in his exhortations, they all cut him off short, and made haste to do the work, as full of an unconquerable ardor of mind, and moved with a demoniacal fury. So they went their ways, as one still endeavoring to be before another, and as thinking that this eagerness would be a demonstration of their courage and good conduct, if they could avoid appearing in the last class; so great was the zeal they were in to slay their wives and children, and themselves also! (390) Nor, indeed, when they came to the work itself, did their courage fail them, as one might imagine it would have done, but they then held fast the same resolution, without wavering, which they had upon the hearing of Eleazar's speech, while yet every one of them still retained the natural passion of love to themselves and their families, because the reasoning they went upon appeared to them to be very just, even with regard to those that were dearest to them; (391) for the husbands tenderly embraced their wives, and took their children into their arms, and gave the longest parting kisses to them, with tears in their eyes. (392) Yet at the same time did they complete what they had resolved on, as if they had been executed by the hands of strangers, and they had nothing else for their comfort but the necessity they were in of doing this execution to avoid that prospect they had of the miseries they were to suffer from their enemies. ...

..and here below some nice stuff on Medieval methods of execution:

Information about Tortures duringthe Medieval period of the Middle Ages

I could go on indefinitely citing the gladiators in the coliseum, feeding Christians to the lions and so on and so forth; this will suffice.

Be all this as it may, I don't think this interpretation damages the Mantra much anyhow. Genocide, suicide, whatever--carefully phrased methods of throwing the argument back on the enemy are still required, and may be similar in any case, so I am certainly not discounting your argument.

In general I dislike getting married to formulae as it tends to restrict thinking.

Many of you will note that modern wars such as WW II feature great barbarity as well and you might ask me how it is that I do not assign the same level of bloodletting and cojones to modern man v. ancient or medievel man.

The answer here is simple: dropping high-explosives on a city from 30,000 ft. requires no direct contact with the consequences of one's actions.

In earlier time violence tended to be upclose and personal. If you wanted to do your enemy in, you had to get hold of him and carve him up.

The gore in such battles of old must have been unimaginable. We live in a greatly sissified age.

I think the reference is to the lemmings that deliberately support policies and leaders that intend to disposess them for starters, and eventually wipe them out.

Examples: Affirmative action, forced busing, integration, homosexual marriage and immigration---not to mention the Obama victory, supported in large part by clueless Whites, who voted for him in substantial numbers.

Some of these, esp. integration and immigration are widely supported by White Yuppies, most of whom are Gentiles.

Then also there is the example of WW II, the war of Western Hara-Kiri, which was prosecuted by United Nations forces consisting almost entirely of Gentiles.

If that ain't suicidal behavior, I don't know what is.

Add to this the automatic forfeiture of city after city which I have personally witnessed here in Los Angeles to the invading hordes south of the Mexican line. It is simply astounding--there is no precedent in all history that I know of for a people simply walking away from their own lands without even a token fight.

It defies belief.

From Waaay Out West,

--HLM

I was just thinking of one of the points you point out today.

Integration, Some time back someone posted on SF or in another forum a link that would take you to a bit of news that HUD had done a study and set up a model back in 1995-98?, that studied the idea of breaking up negro towns and placing/dispersing those negros out into more prosperous ()white) suburb neighborhoods an effort to reduce crime rates in the negro towns.

Within the past two years and just after the mortgage crisis, in my neighborhood I watched as quite a few white families began packing up and moving, I highly suspect the mortgage crisis was the reason. Within a very short period there was a clear concise effort to place negros in those vaccant houses. It all hapened in a very short time-span from the motgage crisis to filling them with negros and it was done in the hardest of economical times. It was federal forced integration was what it was/is.

Somewhere somehow, this should be against some kind of law where they could not be able to do this. In effect what they had done was to take private neighborhoods and inject public housing into the private neighborhoods, which means it was actually federally enforced integration. The federal government has taken it upon themselves to take taxpayers money and force integration into private neighborhoods. I don't know how to oppose such but the U.S. government should be challenged for what they did in privately owned neighborhoods. We already know that the government builds and puts up those public housing project housing free for those useless primates and pay for it fully with white tax dollars, but they should never be allowed to forcefully integrate private housing areas using white taxpayer dollars.

Integration, Some time back someone posted on SF or in another forum a link that would take you to a bit of news that HUD had done a study and set up a model back in 1995-98?, that studied the idea of breaking up negro towns and placing/dispersing those negros out into more prosperous ()white) suburb neighborhoods an effort to reduce crime rates in the negro towns.

Within the past two years and just after the mortgage crisis, in my neighborhood I watched as quite a few white families began packing up and moving, I highly suspect the mortgage crisis was the reason. Within a very short period there was a clear concise effort to place negros in those vaccant houses. It all hapened in a very short time-span from the motgage crisis to filling them with negros and it was done in the hardest of economical times. It was federal forced integration was what it was/is.

Somewhere somehow, this should be against some kind of law where they could not be able to do this. In effect what they had done was to take private neighborhoods and inject public housing into the private neighborhoods, which means it was actually federally enforced integration. The federal government has taken it upon themselves to take taxpayers money and force integration into private neighborhoods. I don't know how to oppose such but the U.S. government should be challenged for what they did in privately owned neighborhoods. We already know that the government builds and puts up those public housing project housing free for those useless primates and pay for it fully with white tax dollars, but they should never be allowed to forcefully integrate private housing areas using white taxpayer dollars.

Right you are. Out West here in California, this process is commonly called blockbusting. It may have different names around other parts of the country.